Using the latest 17.5.2 driver in my Mac Pro (2013) 4-core 3.70 with 16 GB RAM and twin D300 graphics card running Windows 10 v1703 via Boot Camp. Using the COD/IW built in FPS meter it pegs at 91 FPS solid in the lobby waiting to play. Depending on map it usually runs in the high 70's but can range as low as the high 60's.
I was thinking about getting a Sonnet eGFX Breakaway box to improve my FPS. However, my Mac Pro (2008) running W10 in Boot Camp with a flashed EVGA GeForce GTX 980 in the COD/IW lobby gets high 80's and runs as low as the mid-50s FPS. This is surprisingly slower than my Mac Pro (2013) given the D300s are not high end cards. Perhaps its because of CrossFire? True, the 980 is not the same as a 980-TI or 1080-TI but now I'm wondering if the Breakaway Box and a 1080-Ti will be worth the investment.
OK sharing . Similar set up. I'm using an early 2014 new Mac Pro 6 core with the pair of D500s.
For the record Windows, I create external bootable SSDs over USB3 for Windows 10, I don't install a Boot Camp partition on the internal. It's ludicrously easy to do with two free apps for Windows and a genuine Windows 10 ISO. These are all legitimate, registered digital versions as Microsoft always recognizes them as on the same Mac. I use this solely for running Steam and in particular GTA V. I have a lot of them for testing and as backups (this is Windows after all lol)
So here's my question, given I have a lot of these SSDs that are clones of the same bootable, Windows 10 set up, all with Steam and GTA V, I can test many things for comparison. I have used Apple's own Boot Camp Drivers to install AMD graphics drivers and can run Catalyst in full screen. I get around +-60 FPS at 2560 x 1440. The Mac stays reasonably cool and quiet, no different from any game run in macOS. I am an Apple Developer so also test in High Sierra, HFS+ and APFS drives, SSDs and RAIDs so quite a lot of ways to compare.
So .... I also have various versions of AMD hacked drivers including several and the latest Crimson AMD drivers from bootcampdriver here.
Here's the rub, I see no FPS increase over Apple's drivers at all using any alternatives but I do see far more heat as you mention, the fan goes berserk and yes I have MacFan on but I could grill burgers over the Mac. So, what exactly is the benefit in the AMD hacked drivers over the Apple Bootcamp AMD drivers? I know Apple are very slow to release updates but then again why when the cards haven't changed?
Just maybe our Mac Pros don't need anything but the Apple AMD versions? BTW I had to keep running the AppleUpdate app in Windows over and over, it takes about three reboots before you finally get to the latest AMD drivers. Obviously I didn't start of with the latest Apple Bootcamp install pack.
I am running Windows Anniversary and as I mentioned both GPUs in Catalyst set up in all comparisons. GTA V uses DirectX 11 in all cases.
That seems odd that it generates more heat without a noticeable cable performance gain. Others with D700 cards usually report significant gains in fps.
And another big thing is better compatibility with newer software by using modded drivers.
I don't doubt there are more than likely, as you say, scenarios where later Crimson drivers may gain frame rates and better compatibility. Plus your main focus probably isn't new Mac Pros.
I forgot to add that I also now use the Official Windows 10 AMD download to over write those initial Apple's Bootcamp AMD installations This takes the drivers from 15.1 to 15.3 release 4/5/2016 (rounding numbers). support.amd.com/en-us/download/desktop/bootcamp.
In fact in the latest batch of SSDs I set up I have not used a single Apple Bootcamp driver except the Keyboard (just for the sound control on the keyboard lol). I go straight to AMD themselves, not Apple, for the graphics drivers and allow all others to be installed by Microsoft so my stand alone SSD Windows boot disks are almost 100% PC. I clone these SSDs once set up with drivers for other tests so I am always starting from the same point, plus it's faster that way and they are all digitally signed my Microsoft for my Mac Pro.
I was hopefully clear that I only use this Windows installation for Steam with GTA5. So other games have not been tested by me. In my specific set of tests, I definitely see a cooler Mac Pro with the official AMD versions over those you post. That said, again this is only my set of tests, I am running 2560 x 1440 (full screen for Catalyst) with ALL optional graphics settings off in GTA5. I add GTA5 to the AMD Catalyst panel as an application specific subject for profiling by the driver. I rarely see FPS drop below 60 even when for example flying a helicopter over terrain. I non-acton areas obviously FPS go through the roof but that means nothing.
My real life / work is all spent in Sierra and High Sierra. GTA5 is simply a mental diversion/recreational break, as is making bootable Windows SSDs.
Have you tried using MSI Afterburner at all? In an ideal world I would test my drivers on all Macs that I support but unfortunately I havent got the resources nor the funds to be able to do that, so I can only really test on my own M295X first and then gain feedback from users like yourselves on other machines, which I really appreciate btw!
Update: I've now updated to Crimson v17.6.2 and use MacFanControl to get faster fan spin ups at lower temps. I also use MSI Afterburner with a 6% increase to the core settings, i.e. 900 and 1350. Same rig otherwise. I now get high 80's FPS during most of the play on most maps and 91 FPS pegged in the lobby. However, I wish there was someone who sold D700's or even D500's at a reasonable price although the D300's are competitive with most players I now encounter in multiplayer.
Update 2: Rig is MacPro (2013), AMD D300s and running CoD IW with Windows 10 v.1703 (Creators Update) with Crimson v.17.6.2 in Boot Camp. I have pushed the Core Clock to 1000 (norm is 850) and Core Memory to 1500 (norm is 1272)--about an 18% increase with MSI Afterburner. FPS are near 90 most of the time in CoD IW but I occasionally get a fatal system crash and have to reboot. At 950/1425 (about a 12% increase) it seems very stable with mostly 80's FPS and occasionally near 91 which seems to be game limited.
Update 3: Rig is MacPro (2013), AMD D300s and running CoD IW with Windows 10 v.1703 (Creators Update) with Crimson v.17.7.2 in Boot Camp. Using MSI Afterburner at 950/1425 (about a 12% increase for core clock and memory clock respectively) it seems very stable with mostly near 91 FPS (which seems to be game limited) for few test games. No issues yet.
Sorry for the delayed response. When CoD WWII came out, it wouldn't work with Bootcamp on my Mac Pro (>2013) with D300s and 3.7GHz CPU so I switched back to my old 2008 Mac Pro (dual quad 2.8 GHz CPU) with an Nvidia GTX 980i using W10 via Bootcamp. The 2008 works OK but not great with WWII and runs A LOT cooler. I haven't used my Mac Pro (>2013) since for gaming.
The 2008 doesn't do nearly as well in frame rate as the Mac Pro (>2013) did but it is more stable, runs cooler and is still playable with both CoD IW and WWII despite the lower CPU speed. Too bad one still can't pick up a pair of D500s or D700s at a reasonable cost to replace the D300s in my Mac Pro (>2013).
I'm back! After using my old 2008 Mac Pro with an Nvidia GTX 980 to play CoD WW2 and Cod IW, I tried the new AMD Adrenaline 18.3.4 drivers by Mat on my MacPro (late 2013) in Bootcamp and CoD WWII and CoD IW now play great on that machine--much better than the 2008 with the Nvidia GTX 980. I've been looking at options to improve GPU performance on my MacPro (late 2013) but it seems eGPUs with macOS 10.13.4 will not work with Bootcamp and Windows 10 so that route is out. Of course, one could buy a Windows PC or construct one just for gaming but now cryptocurrency mining has driven the cost of a top GPU over the top if you can even get one. My spouse needed a new Mac so I'm passing her mine with the D300s and getting one with D500s which should be a huge improvement. It arrives Wednesday and I'll post some benchmarks when I get the chance.
Well, unfortunately the D500s are only slightly better in CoD IW. This is because MSI Afterburner doesn't work with the Adrenaline drivers and the D500s. In addition, the AMD Fire Pro app does not have an overclocking option for the D500s like it does for the D300s. The D500s get a more consistent 91 FPS than the overclocked D300s so they are better. The D500s seem better than the overclocked D300s in CoD WWII but there is no built-in FPS counter to quantify things.
In the GPU benchmarking program Heaven 4.0, the D500s get a disappointingly low FPS of 40.1 (20.5 - 76.5) vs the overclocked D300s 49.1 (21.1-101.9). Using MSI Afterburner, the D300s got to at least 55.1 FPS.